Tim Bray wrote:
>>  Ruby did
>> not take unicode-centric architecture so something specific to unicode
>> might not always be adopted.  What you should show was how iterations
>> over codepoints are useful (among other encodings); hence his question
>> "When you use each_code?". Manfred's use case is one of those.
> 
> Yes, there are lots of others.  For example, a full-text indexing system 
> dealing with a word like Qu?bec, which needs to index it the same 
> whether the ? appears as one codepoint or two.

I don't know datails of full-text indexing systems,
so can you teach me why one or two codepoints can normalize but one character
strings can't.

> Actually, for many programmers working in Unicode, what they need isn't 
> String#each_codepoint but IO#each_codepoint, because with 
> variable-length encodings it would be very nice if the library took care 
> of the necessary buffer juggling.

You can get a character whether the io's encoding is fixed-length encoding
or variale-length encoding.  Isn't this enough?

-- 
NARUSE, Yui  <naruse / airemix.jp>